Not the full picture. Built from public records, which leave things out.Read by hand, Oct 2026DetailsThis is built from public records, which leave a lot out, and some of it may be wrong or out of date. Check the sources, and tell us if you spot a mistake. What this site can't tell you Read by hand. We read Temiskaming Shores's own documents for this site in October 2026; the Sources page lists which ones. The comparisons with other places still come from the Province's yearly reports.
Questions · 10 so far
Things worth asking about
We read Temiskaming Shores' financial reports and meeting minutes, and compared its numbers with 12 similar Ontario places. These are the things that stood out.
What these are, and what they are not. A question here means a number or practice is unusual, or harder to see than it should be. It does not mean anyone did anything wrong. Most unusual numbers turn out to have ordinary explanations, and every question lists some. The only way to know is to ask.
Worth asking
Worth asking
There may well be a good reason. It is still worth asking what it is.
$2,586,812surplus in 2025, against a budgeted $1,844,078 (2024: a deficit of $42,117, against a budgeted surplus of $1,676,959)
A surplus is what is left when a year's revenue is more than its spending. For 2025 the budget in the statements planned a surplus of $1,844,078 and the actual result was $2,586,812. For 2024 the budget planned a surplus of $1,676,959 and the actual result was a deficit of $42,117. In 2024 spending was $2,574,451 above the budgeted figure (worked out by us). In 2025 revenue was $2,655,810 above the budgeted figure and spending was $1,913,076 above it (both worked out by us). The City explains that it sets its tax rate on a different basis from the statements.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
$8,561,998spent on transportation services in 2025, against a budget of $8,070,060
In 2025 "Transportation services" was budgeted at $8,070,060 and came in at $8,561,998, which is $491,938 more (worked out by us). "Environmental services" (water, sewer and waste) was budgeted at $7,463,546 and came in at $7,964,007, which is $500,461 more (worked out by us). In 2024 the gaps were larger: transportation $1,320,457 and environmental $1,196,431 above budget (both worked out by us). The same two lines were over budget in both years.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 2 sources
$3,400,777user charges in 2025, against a budget of $2,544,970
Total revenue was $37,731,883 against a budget of $35,076,073. Three lines were well above budget: user charges (fees for services) at $3,400,777 against $2,544,970, which is $855,807 more; "Other" at $1,665,719 against $864,720, which is $800,999 more; and federal operating grants at $1,406,425 against $949,500. One line was well below: operating provincial grants at $4,082,108 against $5,053,408, which is $971,300 less. The dollar gaps are worked out by us.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 2 sources
Places keep savings (called reserves) to pay for new trucks, roof repairs and surprises. Temiskaming Shores had $6.1M saved at the end of 2024, down from $7.7M in 2019. That is 21% of one year's spending. Only 1 of 12 similar places had less, compared with what they spend.
Found automatically from the city's financial reports · 2 sources
$7,619,230reserves list total at the end of 2025, up from $6,117,698
A reserve is money council sets aside for a later purpose. On the tax-levy basis the City budgeted a surplus of $726,397 and ended with $1,555,761. The statements show a transfer to reserves of $1,728,165 against a budgeted $726,397. The reserves list in the accumulated surplus note totals $7,619,230 at the end of 2025, up from $6,117,698 a year earlier, an increase of $1,501,532 (worked out by us).
Found by reading the city's own documents · 2 sources
$8,320,720asset retirement obligations at the end of 2025 (2024: $8,148,315)
The City reports a liability of $8,320,720 at the end of 2025 for closing and cleaning up landfill sites, a gravel pit, buildings with hazardous materials, and water wells and pumphouses (an "asset retirement obligation"). The accumulated surplus note lists the same $8,320,720 as "Unfinanced asset retirement obligations", which means no money has been set aside against it.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 2 sources
$2,072,804outstanding on a bank loan the City has guaranteed for the Seniors Housing Corporation
The City has guaranteed a loan of $2,305,959 with TD Bank for Temiskaming Shores Seniors Housing Corporation. At December 31, 2025 the outstanding balance was $2,072,804 (2024: $2,120,773). The statements list this as a contingent liability, which is a cost the City would only pay if something goes wrong.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 1 source
$11,652,571net debt at the end of 2025, down from $14,806,057
Net debt is what the City owes less the financial assets it holds (cash, money owed to it). It stood at $11,652,571 at the end of 2025, down from $14,806,057 a year earlier; the statements call the change a decrease in net debt of $3,153,486. Municipal debt (loans and debentures) fell from $12,775,440 to $10,951,082. The City paid $394,684 in interest in 2025 (2024: $332,949) and repaid $1,824,358 of debt principal, and issued no new debt in 2025.
Found by reading the city's own documents · 3 sources
Temiskaming Shores spent about $480 per home on garbage, dump and recycling in 2024. The typical similar city spent $318. None of the 12 similar places spent more.
Found automatically from the city's financial reports · 1 source
$2,586,812surplus in 2025, against a budgeted $1,844,078 (2024: a deficit of $42,117, against a budgeted surplus of $1,676,959)
A surplus is what is left when a year's revenue is more than its spending. For 2025 the budget in the statements planned a surplus of $1,844,078 and the actual result was $2,586,812. For 2024 the budget planned a surplus of $1,676,959 and the actual result was a deficit of $42,117. In 2024 spending was $2,574,451 above the budgeted figure (worked out by us). In 2025 revenue was $2,655,810 above the budgeted figure and spending was $1,913,076 above it (both worked out by us). The City explains that it sets its tax rate on a different basis from the statements.
Why it matters
The budget is the promise made to taxpayers about what the year will cost. Two years in a row the result landed a long way from the plan, in opposite directions. That does not mean anything is wrong, but it is worth understanding how the plan is built.
It could be because…
The budget in the statements is a restated version of the budget council adopted to set taxes. Note 13 says the City budgets on a tax-levy basis and then reconciles it to the accounting basis.
Much of the revenue and spending in a year is grant-funded project work that arrives or is spent in a different year from the one planned.
A surplus in the statements is not cash: it includes the value of roads and buildings built or received (capital assets), so it can be large while the tax levy is balanced.
Questions you could ask
How is the budget in the statements built from the tax-levy budget council votes on, and why does it differ in both years?
How much of the 2024 shortfall and the 2025 surplus was one-time grant-funded work, and how much was ordinary operations?
Will the 2027 budget be published with a plain comparison of the budget to the actual result for 2025?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
2025 statement of operations: "ANNUAL SURPLUS (DEFICIT)" budget 1,844,078, actual 2025 2,586,812, actual 2024 (42,117). "Total revenues" budget 35,076,073, actual 37,731,883. "Total expenditures" budget 33,231,995, actual 35,145,071.
Note 13, Budgeting: "The City budgets to determine an appropriate tax rate based on all budgeted revenues, including proceeds on long-term debt, and all expenditures, including debt principal payments and the acquisition of tangible capital assets, but does not include amortization or accretion expenses. The City reconciles this tax levy budget to the budget in accordance with Public Sector Accounting Standards." The reconciliation starts from "Tax levy budget surplus for the year" of 726,397 and ends at the 1,844,078 budget surplus.
$8,561,998spent on transportation services in 2025, against a budget of $8,070,060
In 2025 "Transportation services" was budgeted at $8,070,060 and came in at $8,561,998, which is $491,938 more (worked out by us). "Environmental services" (water, sewer and waste) was budgeted at $7,463,546 and came in at $7,964,007, which is $500,461 more (worked out by us). In 2024 the gaps were larger: transportation $1,320,457 and environmental $1,196,431 above budget (both worked out by us). The same two lines were over budget in both years.
Why it matters
A budget that is missed in the same direction every year may be set too low. If so, the tax levy may not show the real cost of keeping roads and water running.
It could be because…
Winter maintenance, fuel and contractor prices can rise during the year, and a bad winter can cost far more than planned.
Some of the spending is paid for by provincial and federal grants that were not in the original budget; the City's grants for capital work were above budget in 2025.
Amortization (the yearly wearing-out of roads and pipes) and accretion may be counted differently in the budget from the actual.
Questions you could ask
What drove the roads and environmental services spending over budget in each of the last two years?
Does the City plan to budget these two lines higher?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
2025 statement of operations: "Transportation services" budget 8,070,060, actual 2025 8,561,998, actual 2024 8,420,992. "Environmental services" budget 7,463,546, actual 2025 7,964,007, actual 2024 8,538,008.
$3,400,777user charges in 2025, against a budget of $2,544,970
Total revenue was $37,731,883 against a budget of $35,076,073. Three lines were well above budget: user charges (fees for services) at $3,400,777 against $2,544,970, which is $855,807 more; "Other" at $1,665,719 against $864,720, which is $800,999 more; and federal operating grants at $1,406,425 against $949,500. One line was well below: operating provincial grants at $4,082,108 against $5,053,408, which is $971,300 less. The dollar gaps are worked out by us.
Why it matters
Revenue that comes in far above budget can mean the tax levy was set higher than needed, or that the money was one-time and should not be counted on again. Revenue that falls short can leave a gap to fill.
It could be because…
Grants arrive when the province or Ottawa decides, not on the City's calendar, so budget and actual often differ.
The "Other" line can hold one-time items (for example, insurance or cost recoveries) that cannot be predicted.
User charges include water and sewer connection and service fees that depend on how much work is done in the year.
Questions you could ask
What is in the "Other" revenue line, and how much of the 2025 amount was one-time?
Why was the operating provincial grant lower than budgeted?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
2025 statement of operations: "User charges" budget 2,544,970, actual 2025 3,400,777. "Other" budget 864,720, actual 2025 1,665,719. "Federal grants - operating" budget 949,500, actual 2025 1,406,425. "Provincial grants - operating" budget 5,053,408, actual 2025 4,082,108. "Total revenues" budget 35,076,073, actual 37,731,883.
Places keep savings (called reserves) to pay for new trucks, roof repairs and surprises. Temiskaming Shores had $6.1M saved at the end of 2024, down from $7.7M in 2019. That is 21% of one year's spending. Only 1 of 12 similar places had less, compared with what they spend.
Does Temiskaming Shores have enough saved for repairs and emergencies?
$0$5.0M$10M$15M
$6.1M
201920202021202220232024
Show as a table
Year
Savings (reserves)
2019
$7.7M
2020
$9.7M
2021
$14.7M
2022
$10.4M
2023
$8.0M
2024
$6.1M
Why it matters
With little saved, a broken bridge or a storm has to be paid for with a sudden tax increase or a loan. Low savings can also mean past budgets were balanced by spending savings instead of facing the real cost.
It could be because…
The city spent savings on purpose, on projects that were planned and saved up for.
Some savings were used to match grant money, which brings in more than it costs.
The city has a plan to rebuild its savings.
Questions you could ask
Does the city have a written reserve policy with a target amount?
What were the savings spent on between 2019 and 2024?
What is the plan to rebuild them, and by when?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
$7,619,230reserves list total at the end of 2025, up from $6,117,698
A reserve is money council sets aside for a later purpose. On the tax-levy basis the City budgeted a surplus of $726,397 and ended with $1,555,761. The statements show a transfer to reserves of $1,728,165 against a budgeted $726,397. The reserves list in the accumulated surplus note totals $7,619,230 at the end of 2025, up from $6,117,698 a year earlier, an increase of $1,501,532 (worked out by us).
Why it matters
Reserves show whether extra money is being saved for future needs or spent. This is context for residents, because the City says reserves can be changed by council at any time.
It could be because…
The City may be rebuilding reserves it drew down in earlier years to pay for projects.
Some reserves are small and meant for particular uses (for example elections or fire equipment).
Questions you could ask
What were the largest additions to reserves in 2025 and what are they for?
Does the City have a policy for the target size of its reserves?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 13, tax-levy budget base: "Surplus (deficit), tax levy budget base" budget 726,397, actual 2025 1,555,761, actual 2024 2,253,177. "Transfer from (to) reserves" budget (726,397), actual 2025 (1,728,165), actual 2024 1,901,666.
Note 11, Accumulated surplus: the reserves, surpluses and deficits list adds to 7,619,230 for 2025 and 6,117,698 for 2024. The note says: "Reserves represent an appropriation of surplus for a specific purpose, determined by council, are non-statutory and subject to change by council at any time."
$8,320,720asset retirement obligations at the end of 2025 (2024: $8,148,315)
The City reports a liability of $8,320,720 at the end of 2025 for closing and cleaning up landfill sites, a gravel pit, buildings with hazardous materials, and water wells and pumphouses (an "asset retirement obligation"). The accumulated surplus note lists the same $8,320,720 as "Unfinanced asset retirement obligations", which means no money has been set aside against it.
Why it matters
A bill that will come due someday, with no money put by, falls on future taxpayers and water and sewer ratepayers.
It could be because…
These costs fall due over many years: the note says one closed landfill needs monitoring for the next 23 years and the active landfill is expected to reach capacity in 2048.
A liability can be shown in the statements without money being set aside yet; setting aside is a separate council decision.
Questions you could ask
Does the City plan to set money aside each year toward these costs?
Which part of the $8,320,720 is for the landfills and which for buildings?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 9, Asset retirement obligations: "Balance, end of year" 8,320,720 (2024 8,148,315). The note says the total expected undiscounted cash flows to settle the landfill site, gravel pit and certain water and sewer assets is $6,215,916 but cannot be determined for the properties needing asbestos removal and certain water and sewer assets.
$2,072,804outstanding on a bank loan the City has guaranteed for the Seniors Housing Corporation
The City has guaranteed a loan of $2,305,959 with TD Bank for Temiskaming Shores Seniors Housing Corporation. At December 31, 2025 the outstanding balance was $2,072,804 (2024: $2,120,773). The statements list this as a contingent liability, which is a cost the City would only pay if something goes wrong.
Why it matters
A guarantee does not show up as debt on the City's balance sheet but could become a cost to taxpayers. Residents can ask how likely that is.
It could be because…
Guaranteeing a housing corporation's loan is common and lets a non-profit borrow at a lower rate.
The balance is falling each year, from $2,120,773 to $2,072,804, so the loan is being repaid.
Questions you could ask
Does the Seniors Housing Corporation report to council each year on its ability to repay?
Is the guarantee reviewed when the loan comes up for renewal?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Note 12, Contingent liabilities and commitments, Loan Guarantee: "The City has guaranteed a loan of $2,305,959 with TD Bank for Temiskaming Shores Seniors Housing Corporation (TSSHC). As of December 31, 2025, the outstanding balance on the loan was $2,072,804 (2024 $2,120,773)."
$11,652,571net debt at the end of 2025, down from $14,806,057
Net debt is what the City owes less the financial assets it holds (cash, money owed to it). It stood at $11,652,571 at the end of 2025, down from $14,806,057 a year earlier; the statements call the change a decrease in net debt of $3,153,486. Municipal debt (loans and debentures) fell from $12,775,440 to $10,951,082. The City paid $394,684 in interest in 2025 (2024: $332,949) and repaid $1,824,358 of debt principal, and issued no new debt in 2025.
Why it matters
A falling debt bill leaves more room in future budgets. Residents may want this confirmed, because part of the fall came from a surplus that was above the plan.
It could be because…
The note lists two debentures that matured in 2025, and no new debt was issued.
The 2024 total included $3,743,590 of new debt issued, so the 2025 fall is partly a swing from borrowing to repaying.
Questions you could ask
What is the City's plan for new borrowing in 2027, and how does it compare to the debt now maturing?
How much of the drop in net debt is a one-time effect of the 2025 surplus?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Statement of change in net debt: "Decrease in net debt" budget 2,550,755, actual 2025 3,153,486, actual 2024 238,043. "NET DEBT, END OF YEAR" budget (12,255,302), actual 2025 (11,652,571), actual 2024 (14,806,057).
Temiskaming Shores spent about $480 per home on garbage, dump and recycling in 2024. The typical similar city spent $318. None of the 12 similar places spent more.
Why it matters
Spending more than neighbours is not wrong by itself. It might buy better service. But it is the first place to look for costs that could be lower, such as contracts that were not competitively bid.
It could be because…
Geography: more roads, more snow, a bigger area or a landfill of its own.
Accounting: some places record the same cost in a different category.
A one-time cost in this year.
Questions you could ask
What makes this cost higher here than in similar places?
When were the main contracts in this area last put out to competitive tender?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Garbage, dump and recycling per home: Temiskaming Shores $480; typical similar city $318; ranked 1st highest of 13.
Temiskaming Shores spent about $212 per home on snow ploughing in 2024. The typical similar city spent $54. None of the 12 similar places spent more.
Why it matters
Spending more than neighbours is not wrong by itself. It might buy better service. But it is the first place to look for costs that could be lower, such as contracts that were not competitively bid.
It could be because…
Geography: more roads, more snow, a bigger area or a landfill of its own.
Accounting: some places record the same cost in a different category.
A one-time cost in this year.
Questions you could ask
What makes this cost higher here than in similar places?
When were the main contracts in this area last put out to competitive tender?
You can ask during the public part of a council meeting, by writing to the clerk, or by contacting your councillors. How to reach council.
Speak for Temiskaming Shores?Send us your answer and we will publish it with this question.
The evidence
Snow ploughing per home: Temiskaming Shores $212; typical similar city $54; ranked 1st highest of 13.
Can we count your visit? With your OK, we use Google Analytics to see which pages help people. It sets cookies and sends visit data to Google. Nothing loads unless you say yes. Privacy